Errors of intuitive logic among physicians

Jonathan Borak, Suzanne Veilleux

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The effectiveness of specific training in statistics and decision-making principles upon physicians' judgmental skills was assessed by means of problems of intuitive logical reasoning. The responses of 43 statistically sophisticated physicians (SP) were compared to those of 42 practicing physicians (PP), 43 clinical nurses (CN) and 41 hospital laborers (HL). On problems evaluating use of faulty heuristics in judgment of conditional probabilities, the SP group's responses were the most biased. The proportion of subjects displaying consistent use of a particular heuristic in solving the three problems were 0.36 (SP), 0.45 (PP), 0.35 (CN) and 0.41 (HL). On problems assessing use of prevalence rate data in estimating probabilities, SP performed substantially better than the other groups: 34% of their responses were accurate. However, 37% of their responses reflected ignorance of prevalence information concepts. We conclude that intensive statistical and decision-making training of physicians is likely to be of only limited value for improving clinicians' judgmental skills.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1939-1943
Number of pages5
JournalSocial Science and Medicine
Volume16
Issue number22
DOIs
StatePublished - 1982
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

heuristics
physician
decision making
Physicians
Decision Making
nurse
Nurses
hospital
Logic
Group
statistics
rate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Development
  • Health(social science)

Cite this

Errors of intuitive logic among physicians. / Borak, Jonathan; Veilleux, Suzanne.

In: Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 22, 1982, p. 1939-1943.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Borak, Jonathan ; Veilleux, Suzanne. / Errors of intuitive logic among physicians. In: Social Science and Medicine. 1982 ; Vol. 16, No. 22. pp. 1939-1943.
@article{521b88861d014082af9678ba916016eb,
title = "Errors of intuitive logic among physicians",
abstract = "The effectiveness of specific training in statistics and decision-making principles upon physicians' judgmental skills was assessed by means of problems of intuitive logical reasoning. The responses of 43 statistically sophisticated physicians (SP) were compared to those of 42 practicing physicians (PP), 43 clinical nurses (CN) and 41 hospital laborers (HL). On problems evaluating use of faulty heuristics in judgment of conditional probabilities, the SP group's responses were the most biased. The proportion of subjects displaying consistent use of a particular heuristic in solving the three problems were 0.36 (SP), 0.45 (PP), 0.35 (CN) and 0.41 (HL). On problems assessing use of prevalence rate data in estimating probabilities, SP performed substantially better than the other groups: 34{\%} of their responses were accurate. However, 37{\%} of their responses reflected ignorance of prevalence information concepts. We conclude that intensive statistical and decision-making training of physicians is likely to be of only limited value for improving clinicians' judgmental skills.",
author = "Jonathan Borak and Suzanne Veilleux",
year = "1982",
doi = "10.1016/0277-9536(82)90393-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "1939--1943",
journal = "Social Science and Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "22",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Errors of intuitive logic among physicians

AU - Borak, Jonathan

AU - Veilleux, Suzanne

PY - 1982

Y1 - 1982

N2 - The effectiveness of specific training in statistics and decision-making principles upon physicians' judgmental skills was assessed by means of problems of intuitive logical reasoning. The responses of 43 statistically sophisticated physicians (SP) were compared to those of 42 practicing physicians (PP), 43 clinical nurses (CN) and 41 hospital laborers (HL). On problems evaluating use of faulty heuristics in judgment of conditional probabilities, the SP group's responses were the most biased. The proportion of subjects displaying consistent use of a particular heuristic in solving the three problems were 0.36 (SP), 0.45 (PP), 0.35 (CN) and 0.41 (HL). On problems assessing use of prevalence rate data in estimating probabilities, SP performed substantially better than the other groups: 34% of their responses were accurate. However, 37% of their responses reflected ignorance of prevalence information concepts. We conclude that intensive statistical and decision-making training of physicians is likely to be of only limited value for improving clinicians' judgmental skills.

AB - The effectiveness of specific training in statistics and decision-making principles upon physicians' judgmental skills was assessed by means of problems of intuitive logical reasoning. The responses of 43 statistically sophisticated physicians (SP) were compared to those of 42 practicing physicians (PP), 43 clinical nurses (CN) and 41 hospital laborers (HL). On problems evaluating use of faulty heuristics in judgment of conditional probabilities, the SP group's responses were the most biased. The proportion of subjects displaying consistent use of a particular heuristic in solving the three problems were 0.36 (SP), 0.45 (PP), 0.35 (CN) and 0.41 (HL). On problems assessing use of prevalence rate data in estimating probabilities, SP performed substantially better than the other groups: 34% of their responses were accurate. However, 37% of their responses reflected ignorance of prevalence information concepts. We conclude that intensive statistical and decision-making training of physicians is likely to be of only limited value for improving clinicians' judgmental skills.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0020361813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0020361813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90393-8

DO - 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90393-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 7157027

AN - SCOPUS:0020361813

VL - 16

SP - 1939

EP - 1943

JO - Social Science and Medicine

JF - Social Science and Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

IS - 22

ER -